[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071228101827.GE1618@ff.dom.local>
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 11:18:27 +0100
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To: Denys Fedoryshchenko <denys@...p.net.lb>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: testing crazy stuff with iproute2
On Fri, Dec 28, 2007 at 01:44:17AM +0200, Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote:
...
> For bandwidth sharing it is perfect, but i want just to make things, which i
> did with TBF - some time bursty speed, and then slow down to lower speed if
> customer is using too much. In theory it has to work like this, but in
> practice i am hitting wall. I tried it about 1 year ago, it was same thing,
> just with another conditions. Seems cburst/burst a bit different thing, just
> to make load on CPU by HTB less , at high speeds.
IMHO it's quite possible you're trying to use HTB to things it is
not intended to do. cburst/burst have to limit burstiness and not
change rates depending on load. But, maybe they could do the other
things too whith some tricks, I don't know. I think CBQ or maybe
HFSC could be better for you. But, if TBF works for you, and you
don't need sharing (lending) I don't understand why to 'fight'
with HTB at all. You could maybe use it only to get class hierarchy
with some high, not limiting rates, or even try e.g. prio + TBF
combination.
Regards,
Jarek P.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists